lurch

Second all the other responses. Put bluntly, no way. The Intro is as big or bigger than yesterday's "expert" suit, say a Birdman S-6 and far more tail-heavy. An Intro doesn't have much for low-fallrate potential because the wings just buckle if you punch for low fallrate, but flown steeply like a lot of students do it goes very fast and very far, and if the student doesn't already have very high-functioning skills they can go very far very fast and get into very deep trouble even faster. I've seen some people with 5000 jumps get into wingsuit and get in trouble and come down scared shitless. An Intro or a Prodigy can and will spin you so fucking fast your eyes bleed if you haven't a clue how to handle it and solid basic freefall instincts. Don't believe me look up Jeff Neb''s bloody eyes photo. I'm not kidding. I've seen the pics. He has spun so fast it busted all the blood vessels in his eyes and I think his toes turned black. He didn't do that in an Intro but he could have. Easily. And he was a master. Imagine getting into that by a slight wrong control input with zero experience and you -don't know what to do about it.- I've broken the 200 jump rule exactly once myself about 5 years ago. Took up a guy at 157 jumps... he was an exceptionally gifted apprentice whose progress and skills I'd been monitoring since his first few jumps, and I'd been teaching him basic wingsuit drills off and on for months. It was his specific goal and I gave him extremely exceptional preparation. He did just fine, but I won't break that rule again. Not long after, the wingsuit community at large started experimenting with sub-200 numbers, I started hearing about a lot of 75-150 jump wonders trying to or actually getting into wingsuit and the number of scary/fucked up wingsuit incidents jumped. Like the tailstrike guys a few weeks back. They had no clue about the forces they were playing with, no better guidance and had no business in a wingsuit at all. And I don't think they were even sub-200 jump wonders. They just didn't know. A wingsuit flight is just plain too fucking complicated even at its simplest to start hucking sub-200's a lot. Experience has shown they just do not have the total awareness and control to handle it as a group. We could teach kids how to drive at 12 years old and thered be plenty of exceptional kids who would do well but as a population they really can't handle that either and we'd see a huge jump in accident rate if the driving age was lowered to 12 no matter how safe we made that training. Coordination and skills and especially judgement just aren't developed enough for it. For some things only saturation level experience grants ability. Wingsuit is one of those things. There is just no substitute for accumulated airtime. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Ok this is just a total win. I cannot imagine how I would handle this. "What the fuck...? I just got corrected on my terminology, punched in the nose, and then my assailant gave me a dead Marten and left?" Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Damn, Medusa. That ain't bad. If you ever get up this way you and I ought to have a little friendly contest. The 3:57... what were you flying? And can you do it again? -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

My first truly daily-driver prototype was actually informally named by Jeff Nebelkopf as the "Godzilla mod"... as good a name as any so I kept it. I can really only claim two working suits. Most of my work was radical variants on an S-6 such as the zillamod. Only reason I'd even claim the zilla as a "suit I built" was it was such a radical rework that between the wings and Chuck Blue sneaking up and picking my decals off people did not recognize what the suit used to be when I flew it in public. That sucker was, like the Hardcase, a true unique one-off and the only in-flight convertible monowing/triwing design I know of. Worked pretty good, too. Easily dusted even a SuperMach1 XS and was still competitive with the X-Bird when it came out. Hopelessly obsolete now of course but I still keep it handy as my backup suit, just in case. So, Hardcase and the Godzilla S-6. Although it'd be cool to be included in the list, nothing I built made it into production, so I don't think I qualify. But thanks for the honorable mention.

Trae- Your suggestion is the kind of thing I could actually whip up in my home shop fairly easily, I have a lot of experience creating electromechanisms, robotics etc. The mechanism is easy to construct. The control and proportioning systems... not so easy. Thing is its also the kind of gear only an already-master bird should be flying. Even the simplest such setup is actually -very- complicated and if it fails or gets stuck... we got a major problem. Much rather start with no tail at all and very gradually work him up to one. The lack of a thigh is a major complication issue here. It could be simplified by adding a structural tie-in to, say, a pelvic harness that would allow a stiff-legged thigh component to build on, but then that complicates landings bigtime so I don't think I'm going to bother trying to work up such a thing. If he lands on it wrong he's gonna get hurt. Simpler is better. This needs to be easily manageable even if the skydive goes wonky and the gear doesn't work as expected. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Thank you Scott, Gecko, Andreea. Al Hodgson is an example of a guy I think would be easy to work with. He has extreme skills already. Unfortunately Stumpy does not which makes this much riskier and a lot more difficult. Scott, what can you tell me about the one armed wingsuiter you just mentioned? His initial skills, how you addressed the issues involved, and final results? What did you guys do? Theres not a whole lot of prior art on this one and I think Stumpy may prove to be unusually challenging as these things go given the nature of his disability and current skills base. I need to know as much as I can before I begin. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Jarno, only purpose of having him fly camera wings a few times would be to start getting him used to having at least SOME wing on. Intention isn't really to go anywhere yet. If we try to do this, (and thats still a very big "IF"), I'm going to have to be very step-by-step and systematic about it. I talked more to him and he really wants a tailwing. My biggest concern here is the possibility of setting him up with something that creates unexpected asymmetry he might not be able to deal with. I love your Prodigy wings idea. That would make for a great stepping stone to bigger armwings. I'm not willing to start trying to set him up with a tail until he is equipped with armwings big enough to easily dominate anything an asymmetrical tail could do, and the easy, automatic skills to do it. I know what a 2-legged bird can deal with, but not what his limits will be except that I know he won't be able to casually cock the tail angle to counter any turns or even outright spin the tail might do if he does not or can not tightly control it. He has at least 100 more jumps to do before I'm willing to begin though, so he has a lot of time to build stronger freefall skills. The thing is, he -isn't- already a highly experienced flyer which makes me FAR more cautious about my approach to this. If I test some gear myself and it doesn't work the way I expected or tries to spin me, I just casually counter it, fly it as long as I want to analyze the failure, deploy and then think "Oops, I didn't think of that." Can't do that with him. "Oops I didn't think of that" will get him killed. Before he flies a piece of gear I have to have thought of -everything- which is why I put up this thread to consult with guys like you and Scott. If he has the stamina and does the hundred jumps he needs, when and if we start working to get him winging it I'll most likely put up detailed descriptions and photos of the gear in this thread for peer critique. Somebody might catch a dangerous flaw or possible failure mode I've missed or overlooked. With my own experiments I was willing to risk uncertain gray areas where I didn't quite know what the gear was going to do. That was kind of the whole point of the stuff I used to make and fly... to find out. With Stumpy, I will tolerate no uncertainty. If I can't prove he will be able to work a piece of gear we won't fly it until we find a way we CAN prove it. My first and foremost commitment in this venture is HIS safety. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Am also thinking if his armwings are big enough in time maybe we can sidestep the entire tail issue by working him up to Mach-size armwings big enough to do without a tail at all, the big lower segments of armwings being a workable substitute. Being shy the mass of one leg he's not as heavy as he looks and can get by with less wing than most. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Bingo... Now THATS a good place to start. I wonder if Robi would be willing to sell him half a Prodigy? Maybe buy the whole thing anyway and work the tail into it later. By itself that won't be sufficient though. I want to see him able to participate in a flock. Include him. Just a set of Prodigy armwings won't do all that much. I don't think it'll be all that satisfying an experience unless we can make it possible for him to fly in a normal flock and really be one of us. He'll need a lot more wing for that. Still, its a perfect place to start. Once he's flying with that we can work on gradually building his wing area and cutting his fallrate till he's flying with the rest of us. I was thinking starting from wings so small they're barely different than standard freefall and go up from there anyway, and a Prodigy is perfect for that. Was thinking starting even smaller though, at least at first. Will not take chances with his life. Progression, theoretical: Camera wings, Prodigy, small GTI-ish suit, finally Mach scale suit and he'll have the range to fly in a normal flock. Got the beginnings of a logical plan here. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Ok. So, Long story short: I met a guy yesterday calls himself Stumpy. Military. Has 140-something military static line jumps with 2 legs and another 90-odd sport jumps with one leg, plus a lot of tunnel time he did when dialing in basic freefall. Guy is pretty badass. Got to talking with him and he was asking about adding a small crotch wing to improve his freefall because he backslides a lot. This led to us discussing whether it'd be possible for him to work his way up to a full blown wingsuit. Guy really wants to do it. I think it can be done safely. Guy has a couple prosthetics... I'm thinking set one up with a knee locked at a 45 degree angle to start with. Basic neutral cruising shape, get him used to flying that, then tweak prosthetic to taste. Obviously he's gonna have a very asymmetrical flying style, but hell, I've flown with half my legwing blown off and it wasn't a problem. I've got plenty experience though and he doesn't. So this is going to be more like a really radical First Flight Course. His left arm got chewed up by a freaking helicopter tail rotor too. He has the use of it, just can't extend it all the way to straight-arm. But I had him take a "flying wingsuit" arm pose, then pressed up and back on his hands to test his strength the way a wing would if he had one on. Looked totally workable to me. Although he's certainly missing some left arm function it does not appear its any function he can't fly without. He has a 260 canopy and butt-slides his landings. No problems here. I've told him I want to see another 100 sport jumps at least, before we can even think about trying to do this but I'm willing to work with him to set him up with the gear needed to do this, develop techniques to make it possible. I'm pretty sure we can build or modify existing gear and make it work. This will be LESS drastic than some of the crazy exoskeletal junk I was building and flying awhile ago. When he's ready I figure I'll do a bunch of freefall jumps with him first, get a look at what he can do and how he does it, design his wingsuit setup around the technique he has developed for normal freefall. Single biggest controllability problem is going to be the thigh I think. He has about a 3 inch leg stump. So no thigh control. That side of tailwing will be limp unless we can couple it to the torso or the other leg somehow. Configure it so the one leg is controlling the whole tail like a spatula. There are rigidity and balance issues with this approach and a high likelihood of creating an angled propeller effect, built-in flatspin. Am also considering other options: A tailless wingsuit: start with just armwings, add a rudimentary tail later, make it bigger as he learns to control it. Or a one-legged tail. Am thinking this gets iffy though because I want to guarantee theres no way he gets into a spin he can't get out of. Really want to guarantee no spin at all, so probably start with tailless suit and build on that. Anyway its gonna be quite awhile before he's ready to have a whack at this but I figured I'd start the homework and research now, well in advance, throw this out there and start soliciting any advice I can get from anyone who may have done this before, and any ideas anyone else can come up with, maybe somebody raises an idea I haven't thought of. Are there any amputee wingsuiters? If so how do they do it? No need to reinvent the wheel if this has been done already. If not then he'll be the first, IF we can figure out a way to guarantee he can control what he flies. "Can't be done" is not an acceptable answer. Imagine the inspiration it would provide for other disabled people if we can make this work. Ideas, comments, anyone? -IF- we take on this challenge we'll need all the help we can get. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

You probably did. I don't trust any gadgets at those speeds. A Pro-track is useless. Its only good for 2 minutes anyway and it typically thinks I deployed out the door. The only things it still does right are count jump numbers and beep. A Neptune is also supposed to be designed to deal with wingsuit speeds but push much past 3 minutes and it starts producing gibberish readings and random pull altis. Its just too slow for any digital alti to tell the difference between freefall and a fast canopy ride. Only thing that gets me accurate time data is video. I suggest a Contour myself. I use a CX100, only because I hadn't seen a Contour yet when I bought it, and the helmet I built around the CX100 was a work of art I couldn't bear to junk just to get an even smaller camera. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Yep... don't care if you present it as mph/avg speed or simple time/altitude. The numbers all translate back and forth easily enough. I haven't bothered to translate 4:00 over 11,000 feet into exact MPH, but an 11,000 ft 4 min. jump is just over 2 miles. Mental math on that is easy... 1 mile a minute 60 mph, 1 mile in 2 minutes is 30 mph, 2 mile descent in 4 minutes is also 30 mph. In my case probably like 30.5mph because 11,000 feet is 2 miles plus a few hundred feet to spare. Neat thing about this stuff is the numbers don't lie and anyone who knows what they're doing can tell if someone else is bullshitting... Like Jarno said, the guys claiming 4:30 from 12 or whatever, which translates to performance figures nobody on earth can do yet in any suit. Any of us can now flare a suit into the 20's and teens but nobody can do, say, a steady 21mph the whole way down yet. Re: Millertime: The ninja trick: Very difficult to successfully describe. Difficult to even demonstrate actually, I've tried. But try this: Am assuming you've already got typical maxed-flight down and can get at least 3 to 3.5 at will. Get out, get wide flat and rigid. Maxed out for speed, distance and time is ideal for none but just sprawled wide decent suit decent pilot, a basic flat sprawl with legs locked and toes pointed gets you in the 3 to 3.5 ballpark, you start from there. Close eyes and imagine you just laid facedown on an air mattress. Now relax. Concentrate on keeping wings as wide and flat as possible while relaxing everything else. As usual for any serious performance move, allow head to droop a bit. The relax thing is important. You can get all the rest of the technique down cold, and if you don't get the relax part right nothing in particular will happen. The relax distributes your weight evenly over entire surface and its critical. Finally allow knees to drop, just a bit. No more than an inch or two, just enough that body is not entirely flat anymore. You can use calves to press down on lower half of tailwing to suit taste in stability, but if you press down enough that you've straightened your legs entirely then you'll go too head-low for the effect to work, you'll slide forward off your air and fly fast forward instead of long, you've spoiled the effect. Actual glide ratio is nothing record breaking, around 2.5 to 1 maybe... figure, 60 mph 30 down is 2 to 1, but only goes 4 miles. This is good to about 6 miles, only way to further is to say screw the fallrate, tip over forward and try to hit 90+ forward which gets you closer to 3, but sacrifices time. Great for getting home in a hurry when you screw up the navigation though. Theres really nothing new about this technique at all. Its a bunch of moves every serious performance wingsuiter has known for years. Dropped knees and head? Thats been a basic ninja trick since GTI's were popular. This is just a very specific combo of a few of the dozens of old low fallrate tricks applied in a certain way, which combined with the "relax" element delivered better efficiency with less effort than any technique I've tried yet. You kinda know if you're doing it right when it -isn't- hard to get 3:30+. I've had flights of 3:30 where my technique sucked and I was trying way too hard. I can get 3:30 to 3:45 by brute force alone with crude technique but it isn't pretty and my arms and legs are shaking by the end of the jump. After getting 4:00 my arms didn't even hurt much. It was easy enough to do that I was able to do it again almost immediately after. A 3:40 done brutally can leave me sore and unable to fly right for days after. This isn't like that at all. If you feel like you're "trying hard" to do this trick, you are. The very Jedi Ninja essence of this trick is that you are NOT trying hard at all. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

I know these days distance is a more popular subdiscipline than duration. But I've always been a long flight fanatic and recently leveled up with my S-Bird, learned a new (to me anyway) ninja trick combo thats good for a solid 4 minute flight on demand and at will. Did two jumps back to back last weekend from mid-13's pulling at mid-2's and got exactly 4 minutes... 240 seconds on both. Could have pulled lower and got 4:10 to 4:15 but did not feel like being stupid that day. An S-Bird is still a lot of wing to manage in a low pull while somewhat tired. Turns out theres a very specific move with the arms knees neck and torso that'll do it, and it didn't even burn out my arms till the end of the second, racked up 8 minutes of freefall in about an hour and a half... I did rest for awhile before going up for the second shot. I can't be the only freak out there thats figured this one out. It wasn't actually all that hard to do and an S-Bird isn't even the biggest suit available, not even close. There must be others. I'm curious about just how many there are who have. So if you've done 4 minutes or more from standard altitude, post it along with the altitudes and what suit you did it with. If you've done between 3 and 4, post that too. I'm wondering how long it'll be before we can build a flock. Imagine the formations and moves we could do with a tight 9-way group that can stay aloft for 4 minutes a pop. My current 3 best are: 3:57, 13.2-2100, 4:00, 13.8-2600, and 4:00, 13.5-2500. Wondering whats next... 4 and a half? Theres a lot of big suits out there now, sooner or later somebody's gonna do it. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Wait a minute wait a minute. Tell me this isn't happening. I thought this HAD to be some silly trolling game. This guy is for REAL? Ok, hold up, don't stop the party so soon, there's real entertainment value, here, Scott. Live and learn, or die and teach by example. I think we have a new teacher in training here. The progress of charging headlong into his own fatality will be fascinating to watch, he seems in a bit of a hurry. Maybe that means he will find a more creative way to get killed than the usual flying-into-solid-objects thing. We can start a betting pool about how long till he bounces. Extra points if you call the incident and nature of it before it happens. These guys usually broadcast their intended fatality method long in advance anyway, shouldn't be hard to guess. I'll put $20 on tailstrike just like the guy last week. Its the easiest way to get killed quick with the elite gear this guy wants to use for it. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Interesting. I hadn't heard about this one at all. Question: Anybody know if they're still planning to hold Wings over Gransee? I had been considering competing. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Straitjacket position is what I used for the 147 kt Otter exits I used to do I mentioned in the tailstrike thread. Arms across the chest guarantees your wings can't blow open, plus it deletes the surface area of arms by your sides. I still use a modified version of this approach to manage sketchy C182 climbouts if the cut isn't to my liking, clinging to the strut without extending my arms and keeping my hands in front of my chest. Launching an S-Bird off a step with a poor cut and the tail right there behind you takes some careful handling, but staying small and just dropping off works fine. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

My lineset is NOT out of trim. The suggestion DOES kinda make me want to do some ground experiments and really see if I can make a snag happen. Theres a world of difference between "astronomically improbable" and "impossible". There IS a square edged tuck tab on this rig meaning it IS possible to tie a knot of line around part of the outer container. Its just that given the geometry, time and physics of the event I judge it so insanely improbable as to be the next best thing to impossible. No reason not to check it out, though. I might learn something. I've seen a few things that were exactly that insanely improbable happen anyway. So I REALLY hesitate to use the word "can't" as in "that can't happen." Reality is a prankster. Every time somebody says that, it happens. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Hmmm, I've heard of this idea before and I'll grant its theoretically possible but is it a significant risk? Not too sure I'll buy that unless the deployment was SO slow and SO sloppy that it actually allowed lines to flop around loosely enough to toss a loop around a flap and then pull tight. The lines are coming from inside. So the line would, against physics and airflow, have to toss a loop of itself around part of the -outside- of the flap. And then hang on it. This strikes me as about as likely as throwing my pilot chute and having it snag on my chest strap. Plus which as you pointed out the rig is designed not to snag. The flaps are roughly triangular and I keep a close eye on my grommets for that reason. Near as I can tell the odds of this happening are damn near nonexistent unless I created some bizarre circumstance such as a trashed pilot chute and such a weak throw that the Dbag could barely lift off and there was a mess of loose line over the opening rig. And even then I'd be more worried about a baglock if my deployment physics were THAT weak, bag arrives at end of lines with no enthusiasm and then just sits there bobbling around on the first stow... not gonna happen unless I REALLY screw up dramatically somehow. I used to leave much less line but for wingsuit, especially the fallrates I specialize in, it was a major issue. My rig is tight enough that risers snagging against the edges of the reserve tray were also a factor. Still, good that you brought it up, got me thinking about failure modes. Can you show me an incident or two where a canopy in tow has happened because of excess line? On a modern gear configuration? And if so what was the gear config and circumstances? And can you prove that any such was caused by being packed that way and not by, say, poor gear maintenance and snagging a grommet or loose bit of flap edge/frayed stitch? I'm not trying to be a testy dink here, but if I'm gonna buy that this is a significant risk or any real risk at all I'd like to see that risk quantified somehow... applicable comparisons, similar incidents in the past. Although I am aware of canopy in tow happening, all such incidents I've ever heard of involved things like really bad grommets or frayed half-unstitched flaps or something, multiple risk factors adding up like skinny HMA lines PLUS a peeling grommet. If I had to put a number on it, my extra 18 inches of unstowed line increases the potential window for this mal from, (wild ass guess) .03 seconds to more like .05 seconds. To the best of my knowledge this simply isn't even close to enough of a risk to worry about. Like getting struck by lightning. -B -afterthought: I'd lay any amount of money you care to name on a bet that if I tried, I couldn't make this mal happen even on the ground. Even by deliberately -putting- a loop around a flap, pulling the loop tight, and then pulling it away trying to snag it. Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

I can't WAIT. When all the loonies suddenly levitate up into the sky or just vanish, all their gear is MINE. I do wonder though... for all those who believe they will suddenly float up into the sky with jesus, what do they think is going to happen as they get some serious altitude? (imagines hordes of believers struggling choking and blacking out from hypoxia as jesus drags them all through 50,000 feet and climbing) Tellya what, its gonna be raining jewelry shoes and shirt buttons for awhile after. Unless jesus remembers to put up cute little bubble forcefields around each believer. And I hope he remembers some kind of gas management mechanism too, or all those believers will asphyxiate in their cute little bubbles right about the time they enter low earth orbit... -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Interesting. I've been teaching a tweaked packjob with short stows and about 1/3 of the lineset freestowed in a coil in the bottom of the container for wingsuiting to create the same effect. Keeps the plucking action on the bag to a minimum with the small line bites, and since the bag has already accelerated to high speed by the time it hits the first stow, theres no time for the bag to twist. Theres just a quick staccato pop and its open. Sort of like deliberately inducing line dump except the stows are still releasing in order. On camera it looks a lot like a B.A.S.E opening, no snivel at all, just a nice solid pop-whump and its open. Worst twists I've had in years has been a single self-correcting 180 with risers crossed behind my head, twice, one of those because I was dumb enough to pack myself a stepthrough. Sucker landed just fine anyway. I had some guy at my home dz start "holding forth" about how packjob has nothing to do with twists and its all body position, apparently with no experiments experience or science to back it up. I love skygods. I pointed out that I developed this technique specifically to combat twists, and when I came up with this packjob my twist rate was about 1 in 5 jumps, multiple twists every time, which has been reduced to 0/1000 ever since, no matter how I screw up my body position on opening. He shut up. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Oh shit... I left my S-Bird alone with the Hardcase. I think that means I'll find a HardBird in my gearbag one of these days... How long does it take a new suit to hatch anyway? -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

I'll have one that does dishes! It'll be made of internet! Runs on kryptonite! And yes, it'll have baling wire and carbonfuckingfiber, plus a nifty new flavor crystal formula with all the chocolaty goodness and twice the calories. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

After watching this thread for awhile I'm with Matt on this. Vb, Storm, what exactly is your objection here? That Justin's material is derivative, based on previous wingsuit instructional works? Of course it is. So is mine. He's done the same thing I did and the ones before me did etc. Took what they were taught, added to it, reorganized it and put it out there. Thats how wingsuit instruction has been done since we started. I've reviewed his material and coursework. It is thorough. It covers what needs to be taught to students in a systematic manner and sets a fairly high and specific standard for wingsuit instruction. When I started teaching I invented a self-imposed rule: A wingsuit instructor should be able to catch and stay with anything in the sky, and teach well enough to equip a new bird with all the knowledge necessary to survive their first few flights until they're self-sufficient. At the time, many calling themselves instructors could not. Most of the ones that could, ended up bearing the ratings of the time. BMI, PFI. Justin has taken this and put it on paper in a defined manner. If you can't catch anything in the sky and teach it effectively you're probably not going to meet the standard and wind up calling yourself an FWC. I went and got a PFI rating because I wanted the credibility and recognition that came with it. The fact that it was a somewhat rudimentary rating then was irrelevant. What mattered was I couldn't feel right calling myself a wingsuit instructor until and unless the other instructors of the time had checked out my skills and said "ok you're good enough to teach too, and near as we can tell you're doing it right." The price of the rating was irrelevant. The most skilled birds of the time could charge whatever they wanted. It was worth it because they were the most skilled birds of the time. Justin's new effort is no different. Legitimacy in wingsuit instruction comes from experience and skill and ability. He's got that. I've been flying with him since day 1 and I know what he can do. I've watched him train a zillion birds already. He gets to call himself an instructor and trainer because he can back it up. Can you? If his rating takes off it will result in another new wave of better educated better trained birds and bird instructors, in turn leading to more. Which is a hell of a contribution to the wingsuit community. If what he's doing results in more, happier safer birds, wheres the problem? -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

Scott, I'm insulted. My posts are not "long", they are eloquent, like a badger choking on dish detergent, or that nifty sound the microwave makes when you've overcooked a 5 pound block of Silly Putty on "high". -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

I do not understand this attitude. One of the many reasons I enjoy being a part of the wingsuit community is, we don't take ourselves too seriously. Sense of perspective for ya: Lets wind the clocks back a few spins of the rock to, say, FnD 2.0. It was my first WS bigway. I had just under 500 WS jumps. Back home I was by far the most experienced wingsuiter for 500 miles around except for Papa Smurf and I could never find him, he was like some kind of legendary stone age wingsuit ninja or something, flew a Classic 1 made of mastodon hide dating from 1973. The biggest bigway we could build back home was maybe a 3-way made of Ken Murphy Dave Godin and myself. I get to Zhills and its as if half the wingsuit population on the planet was there. -Nobody- had any serious WS bigway skills at the time by today's standards because said bigways hadn't been done yet and the skills pool needed to build a truly solid 16-way diamond didn't even exist yet and wouldn't for a few years. Think about that for a second. There weren't enough skilled pilots -in the world- to have pulled it off yet because it hadn't been done. These days we often have almost enough to do that at my home DZ alone and when we DID do it we did it fairly easily and with talent to spare. At the time, "declared" intention or not, the formations being flown were the biggest wingsuit formations in history. I think the max at 2.0 was, what, a really ragged 42-way, with only about the leading 1/3 of the flock in anything recognizable as a slot. The rest was a loosely milling roughly triangular cloud of birds who spent the whole dive sorting themselves out and slowly creeping vaguely into their assigned areas since none of em, myself included, had serious pursuit skills yet and really knew how to go after and take a given spot. For my part I spent dive 1 futilely chasing with wings folded, unable to quite finish closing on the flock, by maybe dive 3 I'd figured out I was going to have to integrate some angled head-downish freefly skills and started actually getting there. I showed up late for one and found Medusa had stolen my slot and was washing around in it in a flashy new S-3 he clearly did not know how to use either. Not that I was any better anyway and at least he got there on time. I was still figuring out that whole "pursuit" thing. I griped at him later for stealing my slot mostly for formality's sake, like "come on, couldn't we at least try to LOOK like we're slot specific?" I didn't really give a damn, it was the effort that counted. I thought the whole thing was fucking epic. I got welcomed by Scott Bland, dissed by Chuck Blue, hassled by Harry Parker and partied with Scotty Burns and Scary Perry. I thought all of this to be most excellent. None of the biggest formations really got close to what we now would call "completion." Check out the videos and compare em to what we see today. But that was simply the best the world wingsuit community could do at the time. Now, anybody wanna call up Scott Bland and Chuck Blue and tell them the formations they were leading at the time were all a "failure"? Even the smaller 20-30ish ways that would have been considered "completed" were, by today's grid standard FAR from anything like "success". It just meant everyone actually at least got in, and there were no stragglers entirely out of frame. I don't mean to sound like I'm arguing for lowering the bar or anything: I'm not... the bar is gonna keep raising itself like it has all along anyway just by skills growth of the community at large. If everyone had a blast, and what we get out of a given event shows progress and growth, then what is there to be negative about? 2.0 and its formations were fun and the result was "better than anything else done to date". To me thats success. I was at Elsinore for the big ones both '08 and '09. I don't give a fuck WHAT the final number actually is. 68? 71? 74 but ragged? Whatever. We can quibble about what does and does not amount to "complete" until the plane runs out of gas, doesn't make any of it less valid in and of itself. When a layman sees a resulting image and expresses wonder and excitement at what we do, do you think their sense of wonder is any less if theres a couple birds half out of slot in the image? Who are we trying to impress, anyway? I guess my point is, if you don't want to regard a formation as a success, fine, but whats the alternative? Call it a failure? It just doesn't fit with what I remember from any major event I've attended yet. -B Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.